Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
🌟 Exclusive 2024 Prime Day Deals! 🌟
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Let’s have a closer look into our president....
- Thread starter tycho1572
- Start date
>> Trump used the pseudonym "John Barron" (sometimes "John Baron") throughout the 1980s. The Washington Post said the name was a "go-to alias when [Trump] was under scrutiny, in need of a tough front man or otherwise wanting to convey a message without attaching his own name to it".[4] Barron would be introduced as a spokesperson for Trump.[5]
The pseudonym first appeared within a June 6, 1980 New York Times article about Trump's decision to destroy two sculptures he had promised to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. "Barron", describing himself as "a Trump Organization vice president", acted as the spokesperson for Trump for three days in that case.[6] Trump continued to pose as "Barron" on occasion for the rest of the decade. In 1983 "Barron" told the press that Trump had decided not to purchase the Cleveland Indians.[7] In 1984, "Barron" gave the press a positive spin on the 1984 collapse of a plan to build Trump Castle in New York. In 1985, "Barron" urged fellow United States Football League team owners to partially reimburse Trump for a high-priced player. The Washington Post suggested that Trump might have used the pseudonym longer "if not for a lawsuit in which he testified, under oath in 1990, that 'I believe on occasion I used that name.'"[4]
In 2006, Trump named his youngest son Barron.
In 1991, a reporter for People attempted to interview Trump about the end of his marriage to Ivana and his rumored association with other women. She was called back by a publicist who gave his name as "John Miller", who gave her a long interview about Trump's marital affairs ("He's a good guy, and he's not going to hurt anybody. . . . He treated his wife well and . . . he will treat Marla well."), his attractiveness to women, and his wealth. The reporter thought at the time that "Miller" sounded remarkably like Trump, and played the tape to several people who knew Trump and agreed it was Trump.[8] She says Trump later told her it was a "joke gone awry".[2] In 2016, The Washington Post obtained a copy of the tape and reported that it was Trump using a pseudonym. Trump denied it, saying "It was not me on the phone." Later, when a reporter asked Trump if he had ever employed a spokesperson named John Miller, he hung up on them.[1] <<
Sure you wanna go down this road?The pseudonym first appeared within a June 6, 1980 New York Times article about Trump's decision to destroy two sculptures he had promised to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. "Barron", describing himself as "a Trump Organization vice president", acted as the spokesperson for Trump for three days in that case.[6] Trump continued to pose as "Barron" on occasion for the rest of the decade. In 1983 "Barron" told the press that Trump had decided not to purchase the Cleveland Indians.[7] In 1984, "Barron" gave the press a positive spin on the 1984 collapse of a plan to build Trump Castle in New York. In 1985, "Barron" urged fellow United States Football League team owners to partially reimburse Trump for a high-priced player. The Washington Post suggested that Trump might have used the pseudonym longer "if not for a lawsuit in which he testified, under oath in 1990, that 'I believe on occasion I used that name.'"[4]
In 2006, Trump named his youngest son Barron.
In 1991, a reporter for People attempted to interview Trump about the end of his marriage to Ivana and his rumored association with other women. She was called back by a publicist who gave his name as "John Miller", who gave her a long interview about Trump's marital affairs ("He's a good guy, and he's not going to hurt anybody. . . . He treated his wife well and . . . he will treat Marla well."), his attractiveness to women, and his wealth. The reporter thought at the time that "Miller" sounded remarkably like Trump, and played the tape to several people who knew Trump and agreed it was Trump.[8] She says Trump later told her it was a "joke gone awry".[2] In 2016, The Washington Post obtained a copy of the tape and reported that it was Trump using a pseudonym. Trump denied it, saying "It was not me on the phone." Later, when a reporter asked Trump if he had ever employed a spokesperson named John Miller, he hung up on them.[1] <<
>> In 1993, Trump told a U.S. House subcommittee that "organized crime is rampant" on Indian reservations -- an assertion challenged by others at the hearing.
And in 2000, he secretly funded ads against a Catskills casino that, according to reports at the time, declared, "The St. Regis Mohawk Indian record of criminal activity is well documented."
Like today, the real estate mogul was accused of making unsubstantiated charges by using "people have told me" as a source, and professed love for those he was targeting.
"Nobody likes Indians as much as Donald Trump," he told the subcommittee.
.... House Natural Resources Chairman George Miller (D-Calif.) told Trump he had never heard "more irresponsible testimony" during his 19 years on the panel.
"You have cast upon the Indian nations a blanket indictment that organized crime is rampant on their reservations," he told Trump.
"For whatever reason, you have a closed mind," Trump told Miller.
"No, Mr. Trump," Miller responded. "I have a closed mind against evidence that is not substantiated. I have closed mind about statements that are made about other people in generalities."
When pressed about his sources, Trump told the House panel: "People know it, people talk about it."
Also at the hearing, Timothy Wapato, who was executive director of the National Indian Gaming Association, which represents tribal gambling operations, called the organized crime allegation "a smokescreen" for efforts by commercial casinos to quash competition from Indian gambling and get federal lawmakers to pass legislation to help them do so.
"Congress must not allow itself to be used to implement the racist agenda of a few greedy commercial gambling tycoons,'' he said, describing such legislation as the "Donald Trump Protection Act."
Seven years later, an ad campaign against a proposed St. Regis Mohawk casino in Monticello, N.Y., ostensibly was funded by a nonprofit group, the New York Institute for Law and Society.
But it was secretly bankrolled by Trump, according to the New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying, now the Joint Commission on Public Ethics. The ads attacked the St. Regis Mohawk for a "record of criminal activity."
To settle the case, Trump and his allies agreed to pay $250,000. They also agreed to spend an additional $50,000 to publish a statement acknowledging that their ad campaign "did not disclose that they were paid for by Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts, Inc." In addition, the statement said they "apologize if anyone was misled concerning the production and funding of the lobbying effort."
... "But of course, now we see that this pattern of duplicity, with Trump repeatedly claiming to have universal affection for a group while simultaneously smearing them, is one he has long practiced," Harrison added. << --- Remember when Donald Trump went after another minority group 20 years ago?
Last edited:
tycho1572
Gold Member
- Sep 2, 2016
- 13,050
- 3,089
- 290
- Thread starter
- #7
I’m sure I wasn’t going to waste any time reading your nonsense.>> Trump used the pseudonym "John Barron" (sometimes "John Baron") throughout the 1980s. The Washington Post said the name was a "go-to alias when [Trump] was under scrutiny, in need of a tough front man or otherwise wanting to convey a message without attaching his own name to it".[4] Barron would be introduced as a spokesperson for Trump.[5]Sure you wanna go down this road?
The pseudonym first appeared within a June 6, 1980 New York Times article about Trump's decision to destroy two sculptures he had promised to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. "Barron", describing himself as "a Trump Organization vice president", acted as the spokesperson for Trump for three days in that case.[6] Trump continued to pose as "Barron" on occasion for the rest of the decade. In 1983 "Barron" told the press that Trump had decided not to purchase the Cleveland Indians.[7] In 1984, "Barron" gave the press a positive spin on the 1984 collapse of a plan to build Trump Castle in New York. In 1985, "Barron" urged fellow United States Football League team owners to partially reimburse Trump for a high-priced player. The Washington Post suggested that Trump might have used the pseudonym longer "if not for a lawsuit in which he testified, under oath in 1990, that 'I believe on occasion I used that name.'"[4]
In 2006, Trump named his youngest son Barron.
In 1991, a reporter for People attempted to interview Trump about the end of his marriage to Ivana and his rumored association with other women. She was called back by a publicist who gave his name as "John Miller", who gave her a long interview about Trump's marital affairs ("He's a good guy, and he's not going to hurt anybody. . . . He treated his wife well and . . . he will treat Marla well."), his attractiveness to women, and his wealth. The reporter thought at the time that "Miller" sounded remarkably like Trump, and played the tape to several people who knew Trump and agreed it was Trump.[8] She says Trump later told her it was a "joke gone awry".[2] In 2016, The Washington Post obtained a copy of the tape and reported that it was Trump using a pseudonym. Trump denied it, saying "It was not me on the phone." Later, when a reporter asked Trump if he had ever employed a spokesperson named John Miller, he hung up on them.[1] <<
I’m sure I wasn’t going to waste any time reading your nonsense.>> Trump used the pseudonym "John Barron" (sometimes "John Baron") throughout the 1980s. The Washington Post said the name was a "go-to alias when [Trump] was under scrutiny, in need of a tough front man or otherwise wanting to convey a message without attaching his own name to it".[4] Barron would be introduced as a spokesperson for Trump.[5]Sure you wanna go down this road?
The pseudonym first appeared within a June 6, 1980 New York Times article about Trump's decision to destroy two sculptures he had promised to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. "Barron", describing himself as "a Trump Organization vice president", acted as the spokesperson for Trump for three days in that case.[6] Trump continued to pose as "Barron" on occasion for the rest of the decade. In 1983 "Barron" told the press that Trump had decided not to purchase the Cleveland Indians.[7] In 1984, "Barron" gave the press a positive spin on the 1984 collapse of a plan to build Trump Castle in New York. In 1985, "Barron" urged fellow United States Football League team owners to partially reimburse Trump for a high-priced player. The Washington Post suggested that Trump might have used the pseudonym longer "if not for a lawsuit in which he testified, under oath in 1990, that 'I believe on occasion I used that name.'"[4]
In 2006, Trump named his youngest son Barron.
In 1991, a reporter for People attempted to interview Trump about the end of his marriage to Ivana and his rumored association with other women. She was called back by a publicist who gave his name as "John Miller", who gave her a long interview about Trump's marital affairs ("He's a good guy, and he's not going to hurt anybody. . . . He treated his wife well and . . . he will treat Marla well."), his attractiveness to women, and his wealth. The reporter thought at the time that "Miller" sounded remarkably like Trump, and played the tape to several people who knew Trump and agreed it was Trump.[8] She says Trump later told her it was a "joke gone awry".[2] In 2016, The Washington Post obtained a copy of the tape and reported that it was Trump using a pseudonym. Trump denied it, saying "It was not me on the phone." Later, when a reporter asked Trump if he had ever employed a spokesperson named John Miller, he hung up on them.[1] <<
Actually it's Rump's nonsense. But yeah you won't find it in that position.
Looks like I got here just in time too.
>> Ehrhart: There's no question everybody appreciated him coming into the league at the time. They needed New York to succeed. Everybody really respected what he was doing in that second year of the league. What caused tension was he began pushing the tape, saying we needed to be playing in the fall, we have to go for it. Some of the other owners in different markets said we need to stay in the spring, that they had too many guns in the NFL. To some degree, both were right.
Steiner: He was the Pied Piper and these other desperate owners went along for the ride. It all happened in a flash. Then the USFL was dead and gone and he moved on to the next thing, which was Atlantic City. Which didn't work out too well, either.
..... The apocalypse arrived in the summer of 1986. Having already lost a collective $200 million, USFL owners, out-debated and out-maneuvered by Trump, voted 12-2 to move to a fall schedule. They also went ahead with a $1.7 billion anti-trust lawsuit against the NFL, who it claimed, among other things, had a chokehold on national TV rights. USFL owners hoped the suit would void the NFL's TV contracts, force a merger, or provide a game-changing payday. So instead of playing football in the spring of 1986, the USFL landed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. (Bassett, one of the two votes against the fall move, died on the trial's first day). Ehrhart says Trump brought in lawyer Harvey Myerson—later jailed for a phony billing scheme—to lead the case. (Another of Trump's lawyer pals, Roy Cohn, the commie-baiting counsel for Senator Joseph McCarthy's hearings in the 1950s, served as only an infrequent consultant, says Ehrhart.) The NFL focused its defense on Trump. It portrayed him, Trump wrote in his 1987 bestseller The Art of the Deal, as a "vicious, greedy, Machiavellian billionaire, intent only on serving my selfish ends at everyone else's expense." To be fair, he's been called worse.
The 42-day trial ended with a jury ruling in favor of the USFL. But it also concluded that the league's dire straights were largely a result of its own doing, not the NFL's, and so awarded the USFL damages totaling…$1. Damages in anti-trust cases are tripled, so the award grew to…$3. The USFL appealed all the way to the Supreme Court, which four years later allowed the award to stand. Including interest, the NFL stroked a check to the USFL for $3.76.
.... Kelly: I'm still owed $250,000 from the Houston Gamblers. One owner told me when we merged that it was Trump's job to pay us back. We were told it was the Gamblers'. Nothing ever came of it. I wrote it off as a loss.
Steiner: There isn't a goddamn difference between Don King and Don Trump. One guy's hair goes north and south, the other's goes east and west. << --- How Rump Destroyed a Football League
Steiner: He was the Pied Piper and these other desperate owners went along for the ride. It all happened in a flash. Then the USFL was dead and gone and he moved on to the next thing, which was Atlantic City. Which didn't work out too well, either.
..... The apocalypse arrived in the summer of 1986. Having already lost a collective $200 million, USFL owners, out-debated and out-maneuvered by Trump, voted 12-2 to move to a fall schedule. They also went ahead with a $1.7 billion anti-trust lawsuit against the NFL, who it claimed, among other things, had a chokehold on national TV rights. USFL owners hoped the suit would void the NFL's TV contracts, force a merger, or provide a game-changing payday. So instead of playing football in the spring of 1986, the USFL landed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. (Bassett, one of the two votes against the fall move, died on the trial's first day). Ehrhart says Trump brought in lawyer Harvey Myerson—later jailed for a phony billing scheme—to lead the case. (Another of Trump's lawyer pals, Roy Cohn, the commie-baiting counsel for Senator Joseph McCarthy's hearings in the 1950s, served as only an infrequent consultant, says Ehrhart.) The NFL focused its defense on Trump. It portrayed him, Trump wrote in his 1987 bestseller The Art of the Deal, as a "vicious, greedy, Machiavellian billionaire, intent only on serving my selfish ends at everyone else's expense." To be fair, he's been called worse.
The 42-day trial ended with a jury ruling in favor of the USFL. But it also concluded that the league's dire straights were largely a result of its own doing, not the NFL's, and so awarded the USFL damages totaling…$1. Damages in anti-trust cases are tripled, so the award grew to…$3. The USFL appealed all the way to the Supreme Court, which four years later allowed the award to stand. Including interest, the NFL stroked a check to the USFL for $3.76.
.... Kelly: I'm still owed $250,000 from the Houston Gamblers. One owner told me when we merged that it was Trump's job to pay us back. We were told it was the Gamblers'. Nothing ever came of it. I wrote it off as a loss.
Steiner: There isn't a goddamn difference between Don King and Don Trump. One guy's hair goes north and south, the other's goes east and west. << --- How Rump Destroyed a Football League
deanrd
Gold Member
- May 8, 2017
- 29,411
- 3,642
- 290
- Banned
- #12
A skating rink?
Fact Check: Has Trump declared bankruptcy four or six times?
Turns out it was six. No wonder right wingers think he's good at business. They still think Bush was fantastic and Obama a disaster.
Fact Check: Has Trump declared bankruptcy four or six times?
Turns out it was six. No wonder right wingers think he's good at business. They still think Bush was fantastic and Obama a disaster.
Our president has a long history of helping others. The same can’t be said for Hillary or obama.
---- like he tried to "help" Vera Coking?
>> Trump's battle with Atlantic City resident Vera Coking in the 1990s is the ultimate example of this kind of Robin-Hood-in-reverse development scheme. Coking had lived in her home since the 1960s, and had turned down another developer's $1 million offer for her house in the 1980s.
In the mid-1990s, Trump tried to persuade her to sell her home to make room for a parking lot for the Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino, which was located next door. When she refused, Trump got Atlantic City's Casino Reinvestment Development Authority to threaten to take the property using eminent domain. If she'd accepted the offer, she would have gotten $250,000 — a quarter of the price she was offered a decade earlier.
Instead, she turned to a libertarian law firm called the Institute for Justice, which fought the city in court. Ultimately, the courts sided with Coking, ruling that the vagueness of the city's plans made it impossible for the courts to determine if the taking would serve a public purpose. << --- Rump Really Did Try to Take an Elderly Widow's House for a Limousine Parking Lot
In the mid-1990s, Trump tried to persuade her to sell her home to make room for a parking lot for the Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino, which was located next door. When she refused, Trump got Atlantic City's Casino Reinvestment Development Authority to threaten to take the property using eminent domain. If she'd accepted the offer, she would have gotten $250,000 — a quarter of the price she was offered a decade earlier.
Instead, she turned to a libertarian law firm called the Institute for Justice, which fought the city in court. Ultimately, the courts sided with Coking, ruling that the vagueness of the city's plans made it impossible for the courts to determine if the taking would serve a public purpose. << --- Rump Really Did Try to Take an Elderly Widow's House for a Limousine Parking Lot
What in the fuck is WRONG with you Rumpbots?
Oh and epilogue --- that casino went belly-up anyway, so Vera Coking would have lost her house for not only nothing monetarily but LITERALLY for nothing, i.e. for no reason, for limousines that didn't come to a place that wasn't working.
One of several bankruptcies he "never had", leaving his creditors stiffed.
Great choice there, Huey.
tycho1572
Gold Member
- Sep 2, 2016
- 13,050
- 3,089
- 290
- Thread starter
- #15
While the left continues looking for reasons to bash Trump, I can’t help wondering why they praise Hillary and obama. Neither of them have ever done anything for anyone without some personal benifit.
Here’s another vid of Trump reaching out to someone. This is a vid about him helping a young girl....
Here’s another vid of Trump reaching out to someone. This is a vid about him helping a young girl....
Last edited:
While the left continues looking for reasons to bash Trump, I can’t help wondering why they praise Hillary and obama. Neither of them have ever done anything for anyone without some benifit.
Actually nobody but you brought up "Hillay" OR "Obama". Just you.
Why is that?
HereWeGoAgain
Diamond Member
A skating rink?
Fact Check: Has Trump declared bankruptcy four or six times?
Turns out it was six. No wonder right wingers think he's good at business. They still think Bush was fantastic and Obama a disaster.
Four or six times on over five hundred businesses.
I'd have to say thats a remarkable accomplishment.
A skating rink?
Fact Check: Has Trump declared bankruptcy four or six times?
Turns out it was six. No wonder right wingers think he's good at business. They still think Bush was fantastic and Obama a disaster.
Four or six times on over five hundred businesses.
I'd have to say thats a remarkable accomplishment.
I'd have to say it's more remarkable that he can sit on TV, look straight into the camera and deny they ever happened.
HereWeGoAgain
Diamond Member
A skating rink?
Fact Check: Has Trump declared bankruptcy four or six times?
Turns out it was six. No wonder right wingers think he's good at business. They still think Bush was fantastic and Obama a disaster.
Four or six times on over five hundred businesses.
I'd have to say thats a remarkable accomplishment.
I'd have to say it's more remarkable that he can sit on TV, look straight into the camera and deny they ever happened.
Got a vid?
Similar threads
- Replies
- 39
- Views
- 329
- Replies
- 16
- Views
- 171
- Replies
- 237
- Views
- 2K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 27
- Views
- 70
- Replies
- 37
- Views
- 204
- Replies
- 186
- Views
- 786
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8473
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 481
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-